Showing posts with label Namibia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Namibia. Show all posts
Friday, May 18, 2012
2011: Namibia’s Year Of Coming Of Age
WE are already seven days into a very significant year for Namibia’s Independence - the year in which we will celebrate 21years of Independence and hopefully get rid of the epic political buffoonery and other negatives that preoccupied our minds recently.
Celebrating 21 years is synonymous with maturity and becoming an adult.
In some cultures and societies a child who reaches that age receives keys from their parents. Such keys signify the opening of new doors and also the transfer of responsibility from the parents to such children.
In most cases the gifts given to the maturing children are of much higher value than the normal birthday gifts.
The well-off parents might even give a child a key to a flat or for a car.
The most significant key, however, is the one given to a child to unlock his or her own new opportunities in life.
With Namibia set to celebrate its 21st Independence anniversary this year, our democracy should be maturing to the next level. We should see a democracy in which political campaigning will be peaceful and elections transparent, among others.
Compared to some other states Namibia has done well since Independence but our yardstick should always be the countries above us. Those are countries known for the integrity, accountability and transparency of leaders they produce year-in and year-out.
Such leaders practice zero tolerance for poor performance, corruption, factionalism, patronage and promote unity in action.
While we are known to be a model of democracy among African states, corruption and cronyism have reached levels that have started systematically eroding the few gains we made.
Albert Einstein once said: “The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them”.
Our problem is the way we see problems.
In the majority of cases we politicise things such as the high rate of unemployment, crime, lack of housing and what should normally be a mature debate for solutions to such issues end up being trashed.
This year we need to realise that there can be no fudging about the bread-and-butter issues. You win or you don’t; you have work or you don’t; there is an abnormally high level of murders or there isn’t.
For such problem-solving we need a new and deeper level of thinking across the board – whether Government or private sector, in Parliament or at traditional level, in the capital city or at a village.
Workshops and trips for the sake of subsistence and travel (S&T) allowances must stop. Instead, we need to work the problems with the affected people and shop for the right answers at their level.
Quick fixes have proven costly in the past.
That is why a few toilets in a rural area like Omusati were built for N$20 million!
And let’s get rid of disposable comrades. These are the corrupt and those whose sell-by dates have passed.
Let our year of coming of age be marked by maturity.
For that to happen a lot depends on an enlightened leadership who are ready to take the bull by the horns. Leaders must be ready to get their hands dirty rather than seek sanctuary in their air-conditioned offices.
There is no better time than 21 years to come of age, and it only comes around once!
Executive Mayors: Shouldn’t Be A Jobs-For-Comrades Scheme
IT seems like it is a given that executive mayors will soon be appointed to run cities and towns alongside chief executive officers on a full-time basis.
I have my reservations about the pace of introduction, how the appointments will be made, affordability of the position as well as how the reporting channels would work.
Local Government Minister Jerry Ekandjo this week again announced his intentions to push through the appointment of executive mayors in full-time positions.
Local authorities are also pushing for the appointment of full-time councillors but that’s non-negotiable in my view. To do precisely what when there are already so many council employees? I’m not prepared to entertain the possibility.
Some countries have executive mayors but they come with very strict working conditions and goals.
I believe that Namibian councillors, especially in the management which is supposed to have a bird’s eye view of council operations, operate in a ‘meeting councillors’ environment. Their only major task currently is to attend meetings and many do not have an in-depth knowledge of the workings of councils.
Getting a full-time executive mayor will thus be slightly more affordable rather than put councillors on such terms.
Such a mayor should run with the implementation of decisions in tandem with a chief executive officer (CEO). If the two operate well together, it could improve the speed of implementation of decisions by the administration.
Currently, we have management committees but they are part-time and their monitoring of the implementation of decisions is limited to the times they meet.
Because of the dynamics of local authorities, I prefer that executive mayors be elected instead of being appointed by a Minister or the President. They must be accountable to the voters.
Having said that, it might be difficult for reporting systems because voters will have a tough time to measure the success of such a person since they do not always have access to information which will help them to do so.
However, if they are appointed directly by either the Minister or the President, clear goals can be set and regular assessments conducted to measure the implementation of such targets.
Currently, the President appoints regional governors.
My problem with the appointment of the governors is the lack of clarity on their accountability.
We have no idea about the goals set for them, how they are measured and what will happen if they are not achieved. Basically the same which applies to the Ministers, whom, we are told, supposedly report to the President (appointing authority) at quarterly intervals.
For transparency’s sake, President Hifikepunye Pohamba needs to reveal the targets he set for each Minister and governor upon his or her appointment. Are they just appointments or performance contracts, for instance? If someone does not perform, what happens to them? Can they be fired or will they continue to collect fat cheques until the five year cycle is completed?
If we don’t know their targets, they remain solely accountable to State House and not to the electorate.
When such circumstances prevail, governance becomes pathetic.
It is partly the reason why some regional councils as well as ministries operate on an ‘auto-pilot’ system. You hardly hear what some governors, for instance, do.
With executive mayors, we need to bring in efficiency.
For starters, get people with good educational backgrounds who will drive the economy of a town and have a good world-view.
You can’t give someone with a narrow view millions and expect them to deliver! You might lead them into corruption. In other words, we need to scale up big time to get better outcomes.
I must hasten to caution that the negative to an executive mayor would be that they can become too powerful through either close links with the CEO or staff members. In the process they can destroy a council.
Others could be engaged in constant in-fighting with staff or CEOs and this could be to the detriment of the entire council.
But what is certain is that we don’t need a jobs-for-comrades scheme or to just get cadres of the ruling party in a opposition-dominated council. That also shouldn’t be the objective of executive mayors.
Those in authority need to think thoroughly before pushing through the changes to the appointment of executive mayors.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Executive Mayors: Shouldn’t Be A Jobs-For-Comrades Scheme
IT seems like it is a given that executive mayors will soon be appointed to run cities and towns alongside chief executive officers on a full-time basis.
I have my reservations about the pace of introduction, how the appointments will be made, affordability of the position as well as how the reporting channels would work.
Local Government Minister Jerry Ekandjo this week again announced his intentions to push through the appointment of executive mayors in full-time positions.
Local authorities are also pushing for the appointment of full-time councillors but that’s non-negotiable in my view. To do precisely what when there are already so many council employees? I’m not prepared to entertain the possibility.
Some countries have executive mayors but they come with very strict working conditions and goals.
I believe that Namibian councillors, especially in the management which is supposed to have a bird’s eye view of council operations, operate in a ‘meeting councillors’ environment. Their only major task currently is to attend meetings and many do not have an in-depth knowledge of the workings of councils.
Getting a full-time executive mayor will thus be slightly more affordable rather than put councillors on such terms.
Such a mayor should run with the implementation of decisions in tandem with a chief executive officer (CEO). If the two operate well together, it could improve the speed of implementation of decisions by the administration.
Currently, we have management committees but they are part-time and their monitoring of the implementation of decisions is limited to the times they meet.
Because of the dynamics of local authorities, I prefer that executive mayors be elected instead of being appointed by a Minister or the President. They must be accountable to the voters.
Having said that, it might be difficult for reporting systems because voters will have a tough time to measure the success of such a person since they do not always have access to information which will help them to do so.
However, if they are appointed directly by either the Minister or the President, clear goals can be set and regular assessments conducted to measure the implementation of such targets.
Currently, the President appoints regional governors.
My problem with the appointment of the governors is the lack of clarity on their accountability.
We have no idea about the goals set for them, how they are measured and what will happen if they are not achieved. Basically the same which applies to the Ministers, whom, we are told, supposedly report to the President (appointing authority) at quarterly intervals.
For transparency’s sake, President Hifikepunye Pohamba needs to reveal the targets he set for each Minister and governor upon his or her appointment. Are they just appointments or performance contracts, for instance? If someone does not perform, what happens to them? Can they be fired or will they continue to collect fat cheques until the five year cycle is completed?
If we don’t know their targets, they remain solely accountable to State House and not to the electorate.
When such circumstances prevail, governance becomes pathetic.
It is partly the reason why some regional councils as well as ministries operate on an ‘auto-pilot’ system. You hardly hear what some governors, for instance, do.
With executive mayors, we need to bring in efficiency.
For starters, get people with good educational backgrounds who will drive the economy of a town and have a good world-view.
You can’t give someone with a narrow view millions and expect them to deliver! You might lead them into corruption. In other words, we need to scale up big time to get better outcomes.
I must hasten to caution that the negative to an executive mayor would be that they can become too powerful through either close links with the CEO or staff members. In the process they can destroy a council.
Others could be engaged in constant in-fighting with staff or CEOs and this could be to the detriment of the entire council.
But what is certain is that we don’t need a jobs-for-comrades scheme or to just get cadres of the ruling party in a opposition-dominated council. That also shouldn’t be the objective of executive mayors.
Those in authority need to think thoroughly before pushing through the changes to the appointment of executive mayors.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Pohamba Is Wrong On Succession Debate
PRESIDENT Hifikepunye Pohamba’s decision, endorsed by Swapo leaders, to put a lid on the succession debate outside party meetings is backward, to say the least.
In the absence of a vibrant opposition, the wider community need to have a say in the type of leader they would like Swapo, as the ruling party, to have.
The call for debate should be about what Namibia needs after Pohamba, rather than who should replace him and this should be encouraged and echoed both inside and outside the ruling party.
In any case the footsoldiers of Swapo politics will talk while toiling the mahangu fields, over lunch hour on a corner of Independence Avenue or in Eveline Street’s shebeens, about who they would like to see in power and how to help him or her to get there.
In other words, the debate will not be limited to Facebook sites or to be re-opened when Kazenambo Kazenambo loses it again while addressing a bunch of school pupils on a courtesy call before touring South Africa.
I am not for public bickering among party leaders and the trading of insults between members of the ruling party. But we need a robust debate that is characteristic of a democratic society.
Such a debate should centre around the qualities of those available and not about their tribe, sexual status or in which camp or from which clique such a person hails.
When President Pohamba and Swapo’s Central Committee put a lid on the debate the President spoke about “reactionary tendencies that wish to portray” the party as divided and plagued by factions.
“We should not wash dirty laundry in public for all to see,” he said.
I would like to rewind to 2004 when Pohamba was elected as presidential candidate for Swapo. The race started in May for a congress which took place in November.
The campaign was on at several levels from unions to party wings.
What was wrong then was the mudslinging and character assassination which bordered on defamation and not the actual debate on the question of a successor to former President Sam Nujoma.
I am aware that during that time Pohamba tried very hard to keep out of limelight.
In fact, when The Namibian wanted to run a story on alleged conflict of interest related to the presidential race, Pohamba refused to answer questions and instead threatened to sue if a story was written about him. The conflict of interest related to allegations that he was in charge of a committee that was preparing the 2004 extraordinary congress to boost his candidacy.
The 2004 race was the first of its kind for Swapo in an independent Namibia and there were bound to be mistakes made in what was a learning process but at the end Swapo had one candidate who won by more than 70 per cent in the national elections.
In addition, while for much of his time as Swapo leader Nujoma was criticised for stifling debate within the party and the country at large, by attaching negative labels to those with whose views he differed, Pohamba was seen as being open to constructive criticism as well as promoting debate.
His ascendency to power was therefore hailed by commentators and political players alike as having brought about a more open and tolerant climate for debate, not only within the ruling party, but also in Government and the society as a whole.
Just as he hit the ground running by promoting a free-market over a command economy as the route to growth, commentators saw him as promoting a free market of ideas as the path to the party’s stability.
Ultimately, stability in Swapo can lead to a good environment for investment in Namibia. Meet any foreign diplomat and among the first things they ask is about the succession debate in Swapo! They want to know where the country is heading for and, for now, the character of the person who will take over from Pohamba is central in that destiny.
As such, any succession debate in Swapo, as long as they are the ruling party, cannot be limited only to those sporting the colours of blue, red and green.
It is therefore a real sea change to see Pohamba putting a lid on the debate after the progress the party made to open such debates from within.
We should all be talking constantly and loudly, about the kind of person we would like to see in charge of the party (and in all likelihood, the country) come the time for Pohamba to exit.
In the absence of a vibrant opposition, the wider community need to have a say in the type of leader they would like Swapo, as the ruling party, to have.
The call for debate should be about what Namibia needs after Pohamba, rather than who should replace him and this should be encouraged and echoed both inside and outside the ruling party.
In any case the footsoldiers of Swapo politics will talk while toiling the mahangu fields, over lunch hour on a corner of Independence Avenue or in Eveline Street’s shebeens, about who they would like to see in power and how to help him or her to get there.
In other words, the debate will not be limited to Facebook sites or to be re-opened when Kazenambo Kazenambo loses it again while addressing a bunch of school pupils on a courtesy call before touring South Africa.
I am not for public bickering among party leaders and the trading of insults between members of the ruling party. But we need a robust debate that is characteristic of a democratic society.
Such a debate should centre around the qualities of those available and not about their tribe, sexual status or in which camp or from which clique such a person hails.
When President Pohamba and Swapo’s Central Committee put a lid on the debate the President spoke about “reactionary tendencies that wish to portray” the party as divided and plagued by factions.
“We should not wash dirty laundry in public for all to see,” he said.
I would like to rewind to 2004 when Pohamba was elected as presidential candidate for Swapo. The race started in May for a congress which took place in November.
The campaign was on at several levels from unions to party wings.
What was wrong then was the mudslinging and character assassination which bordered on defamation and not the actual debate on the question of a successor to former President Sam Nujoma.
I am aware that during that time Pohamba tried very hard to keep out of limelight.
In fact, when The Namibian wanted to run a story on alleged conflict of interest related to the presidential race, Pohamba refused to answer questions and instead threatened to sue if a story was written about him. The conflict of interest related to allegations that he was in charge of a committee that was preparing the 2004 extraordinary congress to boost his candidacy.
The 2004 race was the first of its kind for Swapo in an independent Namibia and there were bound to be mistakes made in what was a learning process but at the end Swapo had one candidate who won by more than 70 per cent in the national elections.
In addition, while for much of his time as Swapo leader Nujoma was criticised for stifling debate within the party and the country at large, by attaching negative labels to those with whose views he differed, Pohamba was seen as being open to constructive criticism as well as promoting debate.
His ascendency to power was therefore hailed by commentators and political players alike as having brought about a more open and tolerant climate for debate, not only within the ruling party, but also in Government and the society as a whole.
Just as he hit the ground running by promoting a free-market over a command economy as the route to growth, commentators saw him as promoting a free market of ideas as the path to the party’s stability.
Ultimately, stability in Swapo can lead to a good environment for investment in Namibia. Meet any foreign diplomat and among the first things they ask is about the succession debate in Swapo! They want to know where the country is heading for and, for now, the character of the person who will take over from Pohamba is central in that destiny.
As such, any succession debate in Swapo, as long as they are the ruling party, cannot be limited only to those sporting the colours of blue, red and green.
It is therefore a real sea change to see Pohamba putting a lid on the debate after the progress the party made to open such debates from within.
We should all be talking constantly and loudly, about the kind of person we would like to see in charge of the party (and in all likelihood, the country) come the time for Pohamba to exit.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Namibia’s Sleeping Giant Called Foreign Affairs
NAMIBIA'S silence around major, but non-related events in both Libya and Japan bedevil me.
Within hours of Japan's devastating earthquake on Friday, South African President Jacob Zuma sent a message to his Japanese counterpart.
This is the same Zuma who recently sent a tough message to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi to "stop killing innocent civilians". Pretoria also froze the Libyan government's assets in South Africa.
Zuma is not everyone's favourite but he seems to be on the ball with some of the things that matter - and especially foreign policy related.
When Gaddafi came under fire Zuma called him by telephone and raised his concern about the killings before he ordered the department of international relations and co-operation in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to write to financial institutions, private agencies and state departments ordering the freezing of assets belonging to Gaddafi and his close associates.
In Namibia, we have yet to hear what either our President Hifikepunye Pohamba or the Cabinet has to say about the civil war in Libya.
I know that Libya supported Namibia materially, morally and politically during the liberation struggle.
Many of Swapo's freedom fighters and nurses were trained in that country.
But it took Libya 17 years to open an embassy in Windhoek. It had only a Charge d'Affaires until 2007.
Last month we read about how Namibia stood up against Gaddafi at an African Union meeting when he pulled an integration report for an 'alternative United States of Africa'. In fact, Namibia reportedly led a group of countries which called for the release of the Libyan report.
That is why it is puzzling when there is a total blackout about our stance regarding current events in Libya.
Worse of all is the fact that Foreign Affairs hardly moved an inch to explain or say something when Namibians on a trade mission, of which the Ministry of Trade was also aware, were trapped in Tripoli.
Officials in the ministry might have been involved in assisting the Namibians (and I hope they did) but doing it quietly is of no help to other Namibians who might want to know about the whereabouts of their relatives.
And the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is there to be seen to serve the interest of the wider Namibian public.
As the mission statement says, it is there to promote "national interests".
Similarly, it is now a week since the earthquake in Japan which has killed thousands and caused destruction worth billions.
But we have not had a single word on the whereabouts and fate of Namibians in that country.
One would have assumed that our Minister of Foreign Affairs, Utoni Nujoma, his deputy Peya Mushelenga or someone high up in the ministry would have called a media briefing to inform the nation about the events there and how we are involved in assisting Namibians there, if not even the Japanese.
When the Libyan revolution started, reporters struggled to get comment because the top three in the ministry were all travelling.
Apparently one or two even attended an African meeting which discussed the situation in Libya but returned quietly without informing the nation about the outcome of this meeting.
Or are they only accountable to President Hifikepunye Pohamba, to whom they are supposed to present a regular progress report on their work?
Isn't Minister Nujoma seen as the next big thing in Swapo? Is his promotion to Foreign Affairs not meant to expose him to the outside world as a future President of the country? If so, I would have thought that he would grab such opportunities worth both hands to show that he was on top of his job!
For his part, Mushelenga is supposed to be Swapo Youth League's secretary for international affairs. It means he is another youth leader being prepared for the future. He should also know the game by now.
Why do they actually travel if they can't brief the nation upon their return? I am not saying we want to know about their everyday affairs but events such as those in Libya are surely of interest to the wider Namibia!
Something is lacking at Foreign Affairs. It is called openness and proactiveness.
It is high time that the ministry wakes up.
, Zuma
Within hours of Japan's devastating earthquake on Friday, South African President Jacob Zuma sent a message to his Japanese counterpart.
This is the same Zuma who recently sent a tough message to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi to "stop killing innocent civilians". Pretoria also froze the Libyan government's assets in South Africa.
Zuma is not everyone's favourite but he seems to be on the ball with some of the things that matter - and especially foreign policy related.
When Gaddafi came under fire Zuma called him by telephone and raised his concern about the killings before he ordered the department of international relations and co-operation in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to write to financial institutions, private agencies and state departments ordering the freezing of assets belonging to Gaddafi and his close associates.
In Namibia, we have yet to hear what either our President Hifikepunye Pohamba or the Cabinet has to say about the civil war in Libya.
I know that Libya supported Namibia materially, morally and politically during the liberation struggle.
Many of Swapo's freedom fighters and nurses were trained in that country.
But it took Libya 17 years to open an embassy in Windhoek. It had only a Charge d'Affaires until 2007.
Last month we read about how Namibia stood up against Gaddafi at an African Union meeting when he pulled an integration report for an 'alternative United States of Africa'. In fact, Namibia reportedly led a group of countries which called for the release of the Libyan report.
That is why it is puzzling when there is a total blackout about our stance regarding current events in Libya.
Worse of all is the fact that Foreign Affairs hardly moved an inch to explain or say something when Namibians on a trade mission, of which the Ministry of Trade was also aware, were trapped in Tripoli.
Officials in the ministry might have been involved in assisting the Namibians (and I hope they did) but doing it quietly is of no help to other Namibians who might want to know about the whereabouts of their relatives.
And the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is there to be seen to serve the interest of the wider Namibian public.
As the mission statement says, it is there to promote "national interests".
Similarly, it is now a week since the earthquake in Japan which has killed thousands and caused destruction worth billions.
But we have not had a single word on the whereabouts and fate of Namibians in that country.
One would have assumed that our Minister of Foreign Affairs, Utoni Nujoma, his deputy Peya Mushelenga or someone high up in the ministry would have called a media briefing to inform the nation about the events there and how we are involved in assisting Namibians there, if not even the Japanese.
When the Libyan revolution started, reporters struggled to get comment because the top three in the ministry were all travelling.
Apparently one or two even attended an African meeting which discussed the situation in Libya but returned quietly without informing the nation about the outcome of this meeting.
Or are they only accountable to President Hifikepunye Pohamba, to whom they are supposed to present a regular progress report on their work?
Isn't Minister Nujoma seen as the next big thing in Swapo? Is his promotion to Foreign Affairs not meant to expose him to the outside world as a future President of the country? If so, I would have thought that he would grab such opportunities worth both hands to show that he was on top of his job!
For his part, Mushelenga is supposed to be Swapo Youth League's secretary for international affairs. It means he is another youth leader being prepared for the future. He should also know the game by now.
Why do they actually travel if they can't brief the nation upon their return? I am not saying we want to know about their everyday affairs but events such as those in Libya are surely of interest to the wider Namibia!
Something is lacking at Foreign Affairs. It is called openness and proactiveness.
It is high time that the ministry wakes up.
, Zuma
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
2011: Namibia’s Year Of Coming Of Age
WE are already seven days into a very significant year for Namibia’s Independence - the year in which we will celebrate 21years of Independence and hopefully get rid of the epic political buffoonery and other negatives that preoccupied our minds recently.
Celebrating 21 years is synonymous with maturity and becoming an adult.
In some cultures and societies a child who reaches that age receives keys from their parents. Such keys signify the opening of new doors and also the transfer of responsibility from the parents to such children.
In most cases the gifts given to the maturing children are of much higher value than the normal birthday gifts.
The well-off parents might even give a child a key to a flat or for a car.
The most significant key, however, is the one given to a child to unlock his or her own new opportunities in life.
With Namibia set to celebrate its 21st Independence anniversary this year, our democracy should be maturing to the next level. We should see a democracy in which political campaigning will be peaceful and elections transparent, among others.
Compared to some other states Namibia has done well since Independence but our yardstick should always be the countries above us. Those are countries known for the integrity, accountability and transparency of leaders they produce year-in and year-out.
Such leaders practice zero tolerance for poor performance, corruption, factionalism, patronage and promote unity in action.
While we are known to be a model of democracy among African states, corruption and cronyism have reached levels that have started systematically eroding the few gains we made.
Albert Einstein once said: “The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them”.
Our problem is the way we see problems.
In the majority of cases we politicise things such as the high rate of unemployment, crime, lack of housing and what should normally be a mature debate for solutions to such issues end up being trashed.
This year we need to realise that there can be no fudging about the bread-and-butter issues. You win or you don’t; you have work or you don’t; there is an abnormally high level of murders or there isn’t.
For such problem-solving we need a new and deeper level of thinking across the board – whether Government or private sector, in Parliament or at traditional level, in the capital city or at a village.
Workshops and trips for the sake of subsistence and travel (S&T) allowances must stop. Instead, we need to work the problems with the affected people and shop for the right answers at their level.
Quick fixes have proven costly in the past.
That is why a few toilets in a rural area like Omusati were built for N$20 million!
And let’s get rid of disposable comrades. These are the corrupt and those whose sell-by dates have passed.
Let our year of coming of age be marked by maturity.
For that to happen a lot depends on an enlightened leadership who are ready to take the bull by the horns. Leaders must be ready to get their hands dirty rather than seek sanctuary in their air-conditioned offices.
There is no better time than 21 years to come of age, and it only comes around once!
Celebrating 21 years is synonymous with maturity and becoming an adult.
In some cultures and societies a child who reaches that age receives keys from their parents. Such keys signify the opening of new doors and also the transfer of responsibility from the parents to such children.
In most cases the gifts given to the maturing children are of much higher value than the normal birthday gifts.
The well-off parents might even give a child a key to a flat or for a car.
The most significant key, however, is the one given to a child to unlock his or her own new opportunities in life.
With Namibia set to celebrate its 21st Independence anniversary this year, our democracy should be maturing to the next level. We should see a democracy in which political campaigning will be peaceful and elections transparent, among others.
Compared to some other states Namibia has done well since Independence but our yardstick should always be the countries above us. Those are countries known for the integrity, accountability and transparency of leaders they produce year-in and year-out.
Such leaders practice zero tolerance for poor performance, corruption, factionalism, patronage and promote unity in action.
While we are known to be a model of democracy among African states, corruption and cronyism have reached levels that have started systematically eroding the few gains we made.
Albert Einstein once said: “The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them”.
Our problem is the way we see problems.
In the majority of cases we politicise things such as the high rate of unemployment, crime, lack of housing and what should normally be a mature debate for solutions to such issues end up being trashed.
This year we need to realise that there can be no fudging about the bread-and-butter issues. You win or you don’t; you have work or you don’t; there is an abnormally high level of murders or there isn’t.
For such problem-solving we need a new and deeper level of thinking across the board – whether Government or private sector, in Parliament or at traditional level, in the capital city or at a village.
Workshops and trips for the sake of subsistence and travel (S&T) allowances must stop. Instead, we need to work the problems with the affected people and shop for the right answers at their level.
Quick fixes have proven costly in the past.
That is why a few toilets in a rural area like Omusati were built for N$20 million!
And let’s get rid of disposable comrades. These are the corrupt and those whose sell-by dates have passed.
Let our year of coming of age be marked by maturity.
For that to happen a lot depends on an enlightened leadership who are ready to take the bull by the horns. Leaders must be ready to get their hands dirty rather than seek sanctuary in their air-conditioned offices.
There is no better time than 21 years to come of age, and it only comes around once!
Sunday, April 11, 2010
ACC is becoming its own worst enemy
THE Anti-Corruption Commission of Namibia is fast becoming its own worst enemy.
The Commission without commissioners is losing high-profile cases on the grandest scale – conditions that cement the propensity for failure of a statutory body created by an Act of Parliament with the mission “to fight corruption in Namibia through effective law enforcement and preventative measures in a professional manner for the good of society”.
I won’t even bother to refer to its vision which states that the ACC wants “to be a world-class Anti-Corruption Commission”!
There is nothing wrong with striving to become a world-class institution but it can’t be rolled into one with sloppy work and bad organisation.
Last week High Court Judge Marlene Tommasi ordered the ACC to return all items seized from Permanent Secretary of Works and Transport George Simataa’s office and his home in Windhoek. These included computers and documents used in an investigation into Simataa’s alleged appointment of a Zimbabwean academic as a management training consultant for the Ministry.
Tommasi declared that the two search warrants that ACC investigators had obtained from Windhoek Magistrate Duard Kesslau on March 1 and 10 were invalid and unlawful.
In the process she set aside any actions taken by the ACC while using the two warrants and told the Commission to cough up for Simataa’s legal costs.
From court documents presented by Simataa’s lawyer, Sisa Namandje, it seems the ACC acted on a story published in a weekly tabloid, but basics, like the heading of the search warrant, were not cross-checked and cost them the case.
The ACC should have known that a search warrant, for instance, should be addressed to a specific officer instead of a general ‘to all authorised officers’ which can be open to abuse!
I have no problem with the ACC acting on media reports, but when sloppiness due to overzealousness creeps in, it drags down the significance of an organisation which is supposed to be one of the brightest stars in our firmament as a country.
Namandje is the same lawyer who took on the ACC, instructed by National Housing Enterprise chief executive officer Vinson Hailulu, and won some of the bouts on technicalities in another drawn-out case.
An additional case which comes to mind is that of Hardap Governor Katrina Hanse-Himarwa, who was acquitted last year on two charges of corruption after Namandje pointed out that the alleged offences were committed a year before the Anti-Corruption Act was enacted in 2005.
Namibia and the world (especially China) are watching the Teko case unfold with an eagle’s eye.
In this one, three suspects – Public Service Commissioner Teckla Lameck, her business partner, Kongo Mokaxwa, and Chinese national Yang Fan – are charged in connection with a multimillion-dollar deal for the provision of Chinese-made X-ray scanning equipment to the Ministry of Finance that has earned them a ‘commission’ of over N$42 million.
Namandje is in the mix again representing the trio. He pointed out that material evidence had not been disclosed to the court when a request was made for the assets restraint order.
The court was also informed that Lameck had written a letter to President Hifikepunye Pohamba in December 2008 to declare her outside business interests – including her involvement in Teko Trading. The letter was never presented to the court by the ACC or State House and thus the High Court found the non-disclosure as misleading the court and unfair to Lameck.
That was one of the main reasons why the Teko trio got their assets back – on a technicality.
The laxity with which such investigations are conducted is tarnishing the image of the ACC as well as those publicly investigated have their reputation sullied. ACC officials are seen visiting or calling in suspects but no public announcements are made to correct perceptions when nothing is found against the suspects.
The ACC needs to remember that they are more than just another criminal investigation unit. They are an organisation whose standing in society, as well as its support and legitimacy, must be beyond question.
They should be seen to be acting in what is in the best and long-term interests of Namibia, not just running around like headless chickens.
This is a symptom of what has happened at the ACC since it started operations.
With ACC director Paulus Noa’s term coming to an end later this year, he needs to realise that the biggest threat to the Commission’s success is weakness from within.
The Commission without commissioners is losing high-profile cases on the grandest scale – conditions that cement the propensity for failure of a statutory body created by an Act of Parliament with the mission “to fight corruption in Namibia through effective law enforcement and preventative measures in a professional manner for the good of society”.
I won’t even bother to refer to its vision which states that the ACC wants “to be a world-class Anti-Corruption Commission”!
There is nothing wrong with striving to become a world-class institution but it can’t be rolled into one with sloppy work and bad organisation.
Last week High Court Judge Marlene Tommasi ordered the ACC to return all items seized from Permanent Secretary of Works and Transport George Simataa’s office and his home in Windhoek. These included computers and documents used in an investigation into Simataa’s alleged appointment of a Zimbabwean academic as a management training consultant for the Ministry.
Tommasi declared that the two search warrants that ACC investigators had obtained from Windhoek Magistrate Duard Kesslau on March 1 and 10 were invalid and unlawful.
In the process she set aside any actions taken by the ACC while using the two warrants and told the Commission to cough up for Simataa’s legal costs.
From court documents presented by Simataa’s lawyer, Sisa Namandje, it seems the ACC acted on a story published in a weekly tabloid, but basics, like the heading of the search warrant, were not cross-checked and cost them the case.
The ACC should have known that a search warrant, for instance, should be addressed to a specific officer instead of a general ‘to all authorised officers’ which can be open to abuse!
I have no problem with the ACC acting on media reports, but when sloppiness due to overzealousness creeps in, it drags down the significance of an organisation which is supposed to be one of the brightest stars in our firmament as a country.
Namandje is the same lawyer who took on the ACC, instructed by National Housing Enterprise chief executive officer Vinson Hailulu, and won some of the bouts on technicalities in another drawn-out case.
An additional case which comes to mind is that of Hardap Governor Katrina Hanse-Himarwa, who was acquitted last year on two charges of corruption after Namandje pointed out that the alleged offences were committed a year before the Anti-Corruption Act was enacted in 2005.
Namibia and the world (especially China) are watching the Teko case unfold with an eagle’s eye.
In this one, three suspects – Public Service Commissioner Teckla Lameck, her business partner, Kongo Mokaxwa, and Chinese national Yang Fan – are charged in connection with a multimillion-dollar deal for the provision of Chinese-made X-ray scanning equipment to the Ministry of Finance that has earned them a ‘commission’ of over N$42 million.
Namandje is in the mix again representing the trio. He pointed out that material evidence had not been disclosed to the court when a request was made for the assets restraint order.
The court was also informed that Lameck had written a letter to President Hifikepunye Pohamba in December 2008 to declare her outside business interests – including her involvement in Teko Trading. The letter was never presented to the court by the ACC or State House and thus the High Court found the non-disclosure as misleading the court and unfair to Lameck.
That was one of the main reasons why the Teko trio got their assets back – on a technicality.
The laxity with which such investigations are conducted is tarnishing the image of the ACC as well as those publicly investigated have their reputation sullied. ACC officials are seen visiting or calling in suspects but no public announcements are made to correct perceptions when nothing is found against the suspects.
The ACC needs to remember that they are more than just another criminal investigation unit. They are an organisation whose standing in society, as well as its support and legitimacy, must be beyond question.
They should be seen to be acting in what is in the best and long-term interests of Namibia, not just running around like headless chickens.
This is a symptom of what has happened at the ACC since it started operations.
With ACC director Paulus Noa’s term coming to an end later this year, he needs to realise that the biggest threat to the Commission’s success is weakness from within.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Tough Union Choices Still To Be Made
Tough Union Choices Still To Be Made
LABOUR analyst Herbert Jauch, pondering the destiny of the National Union of Namibian Workers (NUNW) 10 years ago, wrote that there were “some tough choices to be made by Namibia’s trade unions”.
Indeed true and very urgent, I thought at the time. But how wrong I was.
The umbrella federation has cruised through the last century at the expense of the workers.
The ‘best’ the unions have done is to expose hibernators, fight over leadership and churn out candidates for the Swapo Party parliamentary list.
They continue to lose more and more of their cadres to influential Government positions but they stick to the whims of the ruling party instead of using their positions to the workers’ advantage.
The majority of those leaders have so far been guilty of conflation of political and worker interests.
Each year they contribute to the ‘zombification’ of the working class as they have lost many of their rights through compromises by their leaders.
Last week the new National Assembly has, once again, seen two union stalwarts, NUNW president Alpheus Muheua and Namibia Public Workers Union’s Eliphas Dingara, in the quicksand of Swapo politics.
They are lost to union politics.
In the case of Muheua anyone but a blind man could have seen the writing on the wall.
Like many others before him he has sacrificed his position as a union leader in the party over the past couple of years.
The most significant of his roles was when he sat on the Government negotiating team while he was president of NUNW, and told workers that they were not entitled to their demands.
Muheua was also among the first people who badmouthed the new Rally for Democracy and Progress (RDP) in 2007 when he addressed a workers’ leadership retreat.
At that meeting he also reminded all and sundry that NUNW would remain in Swapo.
He had adopted the same tactic used by others before him who gunned for the opposition and at the speed of light ended up in Parliament.
Unions have thus lost many a firebrand leader who have become spokespersons of the ruling party and Government.
The recipe is the same for every union leader. Make the loudest noise against the ‘enemies’ of the State like ‘Boers’, imperialists, confused opposition; chant for land grabs and foreign-owned media and you get the ticket to the ruling party’s parliamentary list. This constitutes very cheap politicking at the expense of union business.
One of the first signs of the unions’ precipitous descent into the world of Swapo was in 1994 when Bernhardt Esau was the General Secretary and announced that the NUNW was considering forming its own political party. This caused consternation in the unions as well as among Swapo and state security circles.
Soon Esau was summoned to Swapo headquarters and quickly retracted his statement.
By late the same year he, John Shaetonhodi and late Walter Kemba, were on former President Sam Nujoma’s choice of 32 of Swapo candidates for the 1994 parliamentary elections. Today he is the Minister of Fisheries.
The new Deputy Minister of Agriculture Petrus Iilonga controversially remained Secretary General of Napwu while he was in Parliament.
In October 1999 former President Sam Nujoma appointed the late Gabes Shihepo as Deputy Minister of Information. A month before that he was the president of the Namibia National Farmers’ Union (NNFU) and organised the biggest demonstration of communal farmers calling for land reform to be speeded up.
A year later we saw NUNW president late Ponhele ya France threatening with a Zimbabwe-style land grab during a May Day rally and rapping “Namibians of European origin” for being unwilling to co-operate to redress the discrepancies brought about by colonialism.
He was subsequently rewarded with a seat in Parliament.
The million-dollar question is whether the workers actually benefit from the elevation of their leaders.
Unions have become powerless in their negotiations with, for example, the Government.
Workers continue to suffer with low wages, unreasonable dismissals, unabated retrenchments and general disregard of basic human rights as the unions affiliated to Swapo continuously fail to influence policies.
As they are on a Swapo ticket, the union leaders seem more accountable to the party than the working masses and cannot even be recalled by members.
In short, they are Swapo MPs and not unionists.
It is time for the workers to reassert the benefits, if at all, that they get from representation in Parliament. The tough choices Jauch referred to 10 years ago are now more urgent than before.
As it is now, change is a distant reality as long as union leaders are unable to extricate themselves from the quagmire called Swapo.
* This article first appeared in The Namibian
LABOUR analyst Herbert Jauch, pondering the destiny of the National Union of Namibian Workers (NUNW) 10 years ago, wrote that there were “some tough choices to be made by Namibia’s trade unions”.
Indeed true and very urgent, I thought at the time. But how wrong I was.
The umbrella federation has cruised through the last century at the expense of the workers.
The ‘best’ the unions have done is to expose hibernators, fight over leadership and churn out candidates for the Swapo Party parliamentary list.
They continue to lose more and more of their cadres to influential Government positions but they stick to the whims of the ruling party instead of using their positions to the workers’ advantage.
The majority of those leaders have so far been guilty of conflation of political and worker interests.
Each year they contribute to the ‘zombification’ of the working class as they have lost many of their rights through compromises by their leaders.
Last week the new National Assembly has, once again, seen two union stalwarts, NUNW president Alpheus Muheua and Namibia Public Workers Union’s Eliphas Dingara, in the quicksand of Swapo politics.
They are lost to union politics.
In the case of Muheua anyone but a blind man could have seen the writing on the wall.
Like many others before him he has sacrificed his position as a union leader in the party over the past couple of years.
The most significant of his roles was when he sat on the Government negotiating team while he was president of NUNW, and told workers that they were not entitled to their demands.
Muheua was also among the first people who badmouthed the new Rally for Democracy and Progress (RDP) in 2007 when he addressed a workers’ leadership retreat.
At that meeting he also reminded all and sundry that NUNW would remain in Swapo.
He had adopted the same tactic used by others before him who gunned for the opposition and at the speed of light ended up in Parliament.
Unions have thus lost many a firebrand leader who have become spokespersons of the ruling party and Government.
The recipe is the same for every union leader. Make the loudest noise against the ‘enemies’ of the State like ‘Boers’, imperialists, confused opposition; chant for land grabs and foreign-owned media and you get the ticket to the ruling party’s parliamentary list. This constitutes very cheap politicking at the expense of union business.
One of the first signs of the unions’ precipitous descent into the world of Swapo was in 1994 when Bernhardt Esau was the General Secretary and announced that the NUNW was considering forming its own political party. This caused consternation in the unions as well as among Swapo and state security circles.
Soon Esau was summoned to Swapo headquarters and quickly retracted his statement.
By late the same year he, John Shaetonhodi and late Walter Kemba, were on former President Sam Nujoma’s choice of 32 of Swapo candidates for the 1994 parliamentary elections. Today he is the Minister of Fisheries.
The new Deputy Minister of Agriculture Petrus Iilonga controversially remained Secretary General of Napwu while he was in Parliament.
In October 1999 former President Sam Nujoma appointed the late Gabes Shihepo as Deputy Minister of Information. A month before that he was the president of the Namibia National Farmers’ Union (NNFU) and organised the biggest demonstration of communal farmers calling for land reform to be speeded up.
A year later we saw NUNW president late Ponhele ya France threatening with a Zimbabwe-style land grab during a May Day rally and rapping “Namibians of European origin” for being unwilling to co-operate to redress the discrepancies brought about by colonialism.
He was subsequently rewarded with a seat in Parliament.
The million-dollar question is whether the workers actually benefit from the elevation of their leaders.
Unions have become powerless in their negotiations with, for example, the Government.
Workers continue to suffer with low wages, unreasonable dismissals, unabated retrenchments and general disregard of basic human rights as the unions affiliated to Swapo continuously fail to influence policies.
As they are on a Swapo ticket, the union leaders seem more accountable to the party than the working masses and cannot even be recalled by members.
In short, they are Swapo MPs and not unionists.
It is time for the workers to reassert the benefits, if at all, that they get from representation in Parliament. The tough choices Jauch referred to 10 years ago are now more urgent than before.
As it is now, change is a distant reality as long as union leaders are unable to extricate themselves from the quagmire called Swapo.
* This article first appeared in The Namibian
Swapo battle shifts into another gear
Swapo battle shifts into another gear
THE appointment of Utoni Nujoma as Namibia’s new Foreign Minister should not be seen as the high-water mark of his political ascendancy, nor just a run-of-the-mill promotion as some may think.
On the contrary, it is yet another shift in gear for Nujoma junior who has been waiting patiently in the wings to strike at the right time and ultimately become not only Swapo but also Namibia’s President.
Strikingly, not only Nujoma but several others must have walked away on Sunday night believing they had made progress in yet another round of the battle for supremacy in the ruling party and Namibian politics.
Also in this elite group are the likes of new Education Minister Abraham Iyambo and new Safety and Security Minister Nangolo Mbumba. Both have made steady progress in the party ranks and their chances of ending up in the uppermost office should also be seared into the nation’s consciousness.
The dark horse could be the gravel-voiced, outspoken and straight-talking Kazenambo Kazenambo, the new Minister of Youth and Sport.
By the way, these are all challengers for the presidential race after Hage Geingob has finished his one or two terms as well as the emergence of either the first female President in Pendukeni Iivula-Ithana or a Jerry Ekandjo, who is also waiting in the wings.
To all intents and purposes Geingob appears set to become the new Swapo leader, but his followers would be wise to play by the party rules and not frustrate the “power-that-be” in Swapo for the next two years.
By frustrate I mean the noise made by Kazenambo in a local weekly about whether it is time for a non-Owambo leader to become Swapo president.
While Kazenambo has every right to freedom of expression, Geingob needs no campaign team in Swapo to become the successor to Pohamba as things are now.
In July last year, the Swapo Central Committee effectively paved the way for Geingob when it approved draft rules and procedures for the election of its office bearers, clearly outlining the line of succession.
It states that the party’s presidential candidate will come from the top four party leaders in order of seniority. Another line in the document states that if the sitting President cannot be re-elected because of the two-term constraint, the ruling party’s vice president will be the automatic choice as presidential candidate.
It was introduced to avoid a repeat of the 2004 Swapo extraordinary congress when Pohamba had to vie with Hidipo Hamutenya, who has since left the party and formed the Rally for Democracy and Progress, and Prime Minister Nahas Angula, in a three-cornered contest.
A campaign for Geingob will only harden the hearts of those who have started accepting that the Swapo vice president is likely to become their new leader after Pohamba’s exit. It won’t do him any favours as ‘guided democracy’ has already been set in motion.
What it will certainly do is to antagonise certain quarters, widen already existing camps and cause an uncomradely kerfuffle which could easily reverberate throughout the party.
The end result is losing out on a leader who stands head and shoulders above many of his colleagues as a voice of reason.
Without wanting to sound like an oracle ensconced in some seat of better wisdom, I believe that the question on many minds should be whether Iyambo, Mbumba and Kazenambo will now build their ascendancy on a rock or on sand.
For Swapo are, in many respects, a difficult bunch to unbundle. The internal political dynamics can change very quickly. Just take Helmut Angula who ended up jobless after taking on the party’s youth league.
Those who may look askance at Utoni Nujoma’s ascendancy need only glance at other family dynasties around the world. An example is the Bush family in America and how the son returned a few years after the father stepped down as the president of one of the world’s biggest democracies.
Nujoma has an influential group of backers in Swapo, starting with his father, and the power of historical example can never be ruled out completely.
That is despite him trying by all means to be a politician in his own right, and attempting to move out of his father’s shadow.
The 2012 party congress thus becomes increasingly important as any serious contender for the higher echelons of Swapo needs to get into the top four positions and move up the ladder with time.
For now, and as sure as Amen follows a prayer, the political battle in Swapo has just stepped up another gear.
* This article first appeared in The Namibian
THE appointment of Utoni Nujoma as Namibia’s new Foreign Minister should not be seen as the high-water mark of his political ascendancy, nor just a run-of-the-mill promotion as some may think.
On the contrary, it is yet another shift in gear for Nujoma junior who has been waiting patiently in the wings to strike at the right time and ultimately become not only Swapo but also Namibia’s President.
Strikingly, not only Nujoma but several others must have walked away on Sunday night believing they had made progress in yet another round of the battle for supremacy in the ruling party and Namibian politics.
Also in this elite group are the likes of new Education Minister Abraham Iyambo and new Safety and Security Minister Nangolo Mbumba. Both have made steady progress in the party ranks and their chances of ending up in the uppermost office should also be seared into the nation’s consciousness.
The dark horse could be the gravel-voiced, outspoken and straight-talking Kazenambo Kazenambo, the new Minister of Youth and Sport.
By the way, these are all challengers for the presidential race after Hage Geingob has finished his one or two terms as well as the emergence of either the first female President in Pendukeni Iivula-Ithana or a Jerry Ekandjo, who is also waiting in the wings.
To all intents and purposes Geingob appears set to become the new Swapo leader, but his followers would be wise to play by the party rules and not frustrate the “power-that-be” in Swapo for the next two years.
By frustrate I mean the noise made by Kazenambo in a local weekly about whether it is time for a non-Owambo leader to become Swapo president.
While Kazenambo has every right to freedom of expression, Geingob needs no campaign team in Swapo to become the successor to Pohamba as things are now.
In July last year, the Swapo Central Committee effectively paved the way for Geingob when it approved draft rules and procedures for the election of its office bearers, clearly outlining the line of succession.
It states that the party’s presidential candidate will come from the top four party leaders in order of seniority. Another line in the document states that if the sitting President cannot be re-elected because of the two-term constraint, the ruling party’s vice president will be the automatic choice as presidential candidate.
It was introduced to avoid a repeat of the 2004 Swapo extraordinary congress when Pohamba had to vie with Hidipo Hamutenya, who has since left the party and formed the Rally for Democracy and Progress, and Prime Minister Nahas Angula, in a three-cornered contest.
A campaign for Geingob will only harden the hearts of those who have started accepting that the Swapo vice president is likely to become their new leader after Pohamba’s exit. It won’t do him any favours as ‘guided democracy’ has already been set in motion.
What it will certainly do is to antagonise certain quarters, widen already existing camps and cause an uncomradely kerfuffle which could easily reverberate throughout the party.
The end result is losing out on a leader who stands head and shoulders above many of his colleagues as a voice of reason.
Without wanting to sound like an oracle ensconced in some seat of better wisdom, I believe that the question on many minds should be whether Iyambo, Mbumba and Kazenambo will now build their ascendancy on a rock or on sand.
For Swapo are, in many respects, a difficult bunch to unbundle. The internal political dynamics can change very quickly. Just take Helmut Angula who ended up jobless after taking on the party’s youth league.
Those who may look askance at Utoni Nujoma’s ascendancy need only glance at other family dynasties around the world. An example is the Bush family in America and how the son returned a few years after the father stepped down as the president of one of the world’s biggest democracies.
Nujoma has an influential group of backers in Swapo, starting with his father, and the power of historical example can never be ruled out completely.
That is despite him trying by all means to be a politician in his own right, and attempting to move out of his father’s shadow.
The 2012 party congress thus becomes increasingly important as any serious contender for the higher echelons of Swapo needs to get into the top four positions and move up the ladder with time.
For now, and as sure as Amen follows a prayer, the political battle in Swapo has just stepped up another gear.
* This article first appeared in The Namibian
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
